Łukasz Wróblewski posted on Wed, 17 May 2017 10:27:53 +0200 as excerpted:
> About two years ago I created RAID 6 consisting of 5 disks with BTRFS. > One of the disks has crashed. > I started to exchange it for another, but I did something wrong. > Or at the time, RAID56 support was experimental in BTRFS. > There was a situation where I could not mount the partition again. > > I decided to put the disks aside and wait for the better tools. > A newer version of BTRFS in the hope that I can retrieve the data. > > Currently the situation looks like this: > ~ # uname -a > Linux localhost 4.10.12-coreos For anything raid56 related, you'll need at /least/ 4.11, as it has some major raid56 stability patch updates. There's still some issues with raid56, the biggest being that unlike most of btrfs, the parity isn't COW, meaning the traditional parity-raid write hole remains as an issue, a BIG issue for btrfs due to its design, but that's not really fixable without a full raid56 rewrite, so it'll remain the case with the existing raid56 mode likely forever, and a new implementation that COWs parity as well may eventually happen. But the patches that went into 4.11 fix the known existing issues other than the usual write hole, and they're effectively mandatory for any attempt at repair or recovery of existing raid56 once there are issues of any sort. They're not a guarantee of a fix, but before that, any attempt at a fix has a rather good chance of making the problem worse instead of better, so you really do want 4.11 if you're doing btrfs raid56 at all. Beyond that, I'll let others more familiar with btrfs raid56 help, but I'd still not recommend it, even with those fixes. IMO, the existence of the parity-raid write hole simply doesn't work well with btrfs general assumptions, and can't and won't work well until there's a COW-parity based btrfs parity-raid solution, so even with those fixes I wouldn't use it myself, nor can I in good faith recommend it to others. The best I could recommend is getting off of it, possibly by blowing away the existing btrfs raid56 mode filesystem and recreating as whatever, then restoring from backups. Of course if you didn't have backups of data on a known experimental btrfs raid56 mode, then as is always the case even on mature filesystems on known good hardware, but even more so given the experimental nature of btrfs raid56, you were deliberately defining the data as not worth the time and trouble to do the backups, so there's nothing really to lose by doing that, since you already saved what you self-evidently considered more important, the time and resources you would have otherwise put into doing that backup and keeping it current. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
